The Isha Upanishad is significant amongst the Upanishads for its description of the nature of the supreme being (Ish). It presents a monist or non-dual perspective of the universe, in that it describes this being as[1] "unembodied, omniscient, beyond reproach, without veins, pure and uncontaminated" (verse 8), one who "moves and does not move', who is 'far away, but very near as well'" and who "although fixed in His abode is swifter than the mind" (verses 4 & 5).

The text then asserts the oneness of the supreme self;

"For the enlightened one all that exists is nothing but the Self"and asks;

"So how could any delusion or suffering continue for those who know this oneness?"The later verses take the form of a series of prayers requesting that the speaker be able to see past the supreme light or effulgence in order to understand the true nature of the Supreme Lord.

Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi thought so highly of this text that he remarked, "If all the Upanishads and all the other scriptures happened all of a sudden to be reduced to ashes, and if only the first verse in the Ishopanishad were left in the memory of the Hindus, Hinduism would live for ever."[2] The shloka Mahatma Gandhi was referring to is as follows. "This world and everything in this world is all filled by the all pervading Brahman (...Remembering this,) savor the world with renunciation and do not greed upon anyone's wealth."

Thanks for sharing, Dan! Are you a practicing participant? If so, how has it changed you? Would it do anything for me? This miserable soul with nothing but banal, practical, materialistic goals?.... Myself being suspicious of anything related to Christianity (including the historical Jesus accounts), other than the Spiritual Christ concept itself...

I am not a member of any organized religion, including the Ishayas. Maybe I will become convinced of Joesus' claims and submit to him, but I feel this to be highly unlikely. However, I do believe Joesus when he says you can be changed by his system. He is a shining example of how hard-headed, er, .. stable one can become after years of focus on one's goal. For pure meditation, he may be a real champ.

As far as the Isha upanishads are concerned, they are philosophically originating from the Vedic tradition (hinduism) and appear to be an attempt at merging monotheistic thought (Isha = Lord) with non-duality (advaita, there is only One). Since these are mutually exclusive, (monotheism is intrinsically dualistic, in contradiction to non-duality), it appears that belief in the divine inspiration of the Isha upanishad might support a bit of fence-straddling.

The lord implied by the word Isha, is both internal and external. It resides within all individual awareness, and when awakened, expresses itself as a unified awareness of the ONE absolute consciousness thru the outward manifestation of the human psyche.

An individual becomes anointed or Christed as was Jesus the Christ. In Buddhism, Isha is the Buddhi within, and the manifestation of Buddha or the enlightened one in the outward expression of Unified Consciousness.

The monotheistic approach was a product of Churchianity and had nothing to do with expanded conscious awareness, but rather superstition and ignorance.

Any approach to consciousness that is not supported by expanded awareness and the experience of Christed consciousness invariably becomes a religion.

People who have not themselves made any study, or invested themselves in the philosophy of enlightenment tend to clump it all together into a neat little package called religion.

Anyone can call an organized body of study and belief a religion. Science fits into that category. Any organized body that surrenders itself to a higher body as an authority assumes the role of any religionist.

I find this terminology curious. "Anointed"? "Christed"? Why use language that carries baggage from Christianity? Are there words or groups of words that you could use to describe these properties?

I find it even more curious that very few can see thru the baggage of religious twists to see and understand the original meanings of scripture.

I think it is similar to a person who would think they have learned medicine from watching Marcus Welby M.D. Rather than actually studying medicine. The language one picks up and uses from watching Television probably wouldn't make any sense to a real doctor.

It involves expanding the awareness into the absolute and bringing it forward into every experience to rise above the three known states of consciousness that is waking dreaming and sleeping into another state of consciousness, which then reflects itself in the known three.

If you want to read scripture and you want to get anything out of it you would need to understand the terminology.

Now that isn't a very Christ-like way to treat an ignorant soul! tsk tsk ...

QUOTE(Joesus @ Feb 21, 2012, 09:03 PM)

...blah blah stuff grr!! blah ...

It involves expanding the awareness into the absolute and bringing it forward into every experience to rise above the three known states of consciousness that is waking dreaming and sleeping into another state of consciousness, which then reflects itself in the known three.

... more grrr! blah stuff stuff ...

So that is "anointed" and "Christed"? Or is it just one of them? Don't make me ask Wikipedia!

That, is a way of describing qualities of Christed consciousness, or what was called the anointing of consciousness with the knowledge stick, or stick of knowledge, in scripture (like the Isha Upanishads).

QUOTE(Dan @ Feb 22, 2012, 03:45 AM)

Don't make me ask Wikipedia!

Couldn't find it on wiki but found this...

Web definitions

(Christing) is the Oversoul descending to be enfolded within the outer physical sheath.

viachrista.org/Glossary.html

(Christing) The manifestation of the Cosmic Christ Consciousness within an individual or Group of Individuals on Planet Earth. ...

Regardless of your sus-like behavior, I take pity on the rest of brain-meta and try to set an example for anyone who might find themselves challenged by the gossip columnists and rumormills of the spiritually challenged.

The game of this thread is to look for modes of thought that might get him past the "Ishaya" mindset and allow him to put his own feelings in words. I think he has already done a lot of that, but there is work yet!

Which follows your history of verbal abuse.

QUOTE(Dan @ Nov 04, 2003, 08:42 PM)

since I can't be heard on your own board without being seen as 'abusive', I thought I'd bring it over here.

Your 'philosophy' is junk, all you do is convince people to ditch their life and follow you into your own narcissistic delusions. The fact of the matter is that you are a sociopath, manipulating people without conscience.

your little cult is laughably transparent to anybody who is not fooled by your 'charm' and your philosophy of intentional ignorance. I pity all the fools who believe in you and follow you, because in the end they will have to come to terms with the dismal condition they have fallen into.

... I take pity on the rest of brain-meta and try to set an example for anyone who might find themselves challenged by the gossip columnists and rumormills of the spiritually challenged.

Well, why didn't you just say so a long time ago? Now I know, your interest in Brain Meta (and presumably in the world at large) is a function of pity for "anyone who (is challenged)". Presumably your actions toward these "others" are intended to lead them to less pitiful states of consciousness. This is very much in line with the messianic mission of Jesus as is commonly taught (although the "methods" may not be the same).

This makes me wonder ... if there is only Brahman, and you realize this, then you are manifesting Brahman pitying itself? Why would Brahman pity itself? Self pity is surely not what you are expressing. Is this really a belief that there are "other" atmans or selfs, resulting in the "christ" thoughtform that causes Brahman to altruistically "save" these perceived "others" from their misfortune?

Consider this analogy. When I accidentally hit my finger with a hammer, I do not feel my finger is a "self" therefore pity does not apply to it. Nor do I feel self pity, because I have realized and accepted the futility of such behavior. I do, however, act quickly to heal the finger. After all, the worse state my finger is in, the more my life sux. I heal my finger so that I (not my finger) do not suffer.

If I am a deluded being, I may believe that there are other selfs. This is a most natural belief of humans. Since I am a nice self, I will pity these other selfs and try to help them by giving my best. However, if I have lost my flippin' marbles and realized Brahman, I have transcended the belief of "others" by knowing that there is only Brahman. Then what sense does it make to speak of pity?

if I have lost my flippin' marbles and realized Brahman, I have transcended the belief of "others" by knowing that there is only Brahman. Then what sense does it make to speak of pity?

If you've lost your flippin marbles nothing would make sense would it..? If someone didn't notice and take pity or have compassion, you would most likely fade away without being able to connect to life in any meaningful way.

Your analogy of the finger would make sense in that if you were a finger and part of the larger body, and were bashed, the rest of the body would do something to heal it, to save the rest of the body from suffering. This is an analogy of the greater whole in its connection with all of human consciousness. The unified awareness of Brahman.

Generally speaking the separation of human ideals is a common condition of humanity, where no one cares for anyone if they are out of site and out of mind. Mostly people are concerned with making their private universe impenetrable and safe from anyone who does not fit into their personal idea of reality.

Since all is Brahman. You would need to know what Brahman was, in order to set your mind at rest, otherwise you might have a difficult time keeping track of your marbles, chasing everyone elses to make sure they don't have yours or are threatening your marbles.You might lose your temper and make accusations toward others just to satisfy you sense of separation. Measuring yourself against others for fear of losing your marbles, or that others might have more than you.

if I have lost my flippin' marbles and realized Brahman, I have transcended the belief of "others" by knowing that there is only Brahman. Then what sense does it make to speak of pity?

If you've lost your flippin marbles nothing would make sense would it..?

That was just a bit of funnin'! Of course one who attains Brahman has found everything in nothing and realizes marbles for what they are.

QUOTE(Joesus @ Feb 22, 2012, 04:40 PM)

Your analogy of the finger would make sense in that if you were a finger and part of the larger body, ...

That makes sense only if you see the finger as (or in association with) a "self" that is different from the "larger body" self. Or perhaps you see "self" as a continuum object that has "parts" or perhaps "regions"?

QUOTE(Joesus @ Feb 22, 2012, 04:40 PM)

...and were bashed, the rest of the body would do something to heal it, to save the rest of the body from suffering. This is an analogy of the greater whole in its connection with all of human consciousness. The unified awareness of Brahman.

This is not "unified" because it includes the concept of separation. If finger is a "self" that is distinct from the "larger body", you have separation. My description is meant to illuminate a non-dual perspective, where there is only Brahman and the experience. Nothing in the experience is a "self" distinct from Brahman.

QUOTE(Joesus @ Feb 22, 2012, 04:40 PM)

Generally speaking the separation of human ideals is a common condition of humanity, where no one cares for anyone if they are out of site and out of mind. Mostly people are concerned with making their private universe impenetrable and safe from anyone who does not fit into their personal idea of reality.

These are thoughtforms associated with being human. While certainly worthy in the sense that they are important to being human, they are a distraction for one who seeks to experience non-duality.

QUOTE(Joesus @ Feb 22, 2012, 04:40 PM)

Since all is Brahman. You would need to know what Brahman was in order to set your mind at rest...

You can't know Brahman, you can only experience being Brahman. You can "know" the logical implications of unity/non-duality and deduce the contradiction with belief in "others". You may still be motivated toward something resembling altruism, but not because of pity.

QUOTE(Joesus @ Feb 22, 2012, 04:40 PM)

... otherwise you might have a difficult time keeping track of your marbles, chasing everyone elses to make sure they don't have yours or are threatening your marbles.

Some people just hide their marbles and play cat-and-mouse games to keep safe. They still have marbles to lose.

QUOTE(Joesus @ Feb 22, 2012, 04:40 PM)

You might lose your temper and make accusations toward others just to satisfy you sense of separation. Measuring yourself against others for fear of losing your marbles, or that others might have more than you.

The strike first method is the method of the unstable mind.

The "head in the sand" method is also a viable option for the deluded, a much nicer one for "others" for sure but no less delusory for the sandy-haired

That makes sense only if you see the finger as (or in association with) a "self" that is different from the "larger body" self. Or perhaps you see "self" as a continuum object that has "parts" or perhaps "regions"?

Not different but an associate of integrated awareness.

QUOTE(Dan @ Feb 22, 2012, 11:39 PM)

This is not "unified" because it includes the concept of separation. If finger is a "self" that is distinct from the "larger body", you have separation. My description is meant to illuminate a non-dual perspective, where there is only Brahman and the experience. Nothing in the experience is a "self" distinct from Brahman.

Not distinct from Brahman but distinct within itself as a quality of Brahman. There is no separation but instead integration.All the cells in your body have their own consciousness, self awareness, and they are also aware that they are part of a larger body of organized consciousness.

QUOTE(Dan @ Feb 22, 2012, 11:39 PM)

These are thoughtforms associated with being human. While certainly worthy in the sense that they are important to being human, they are a distraction for one who seeks to experience non-duality.

They are a necessity to understand union where duality also exists.

QUOTE(Dan @ Feb 22, 2012, 11:39 PM)

You can't know Brahman, you can only experience being Brahman.

How would you know you are experiencing Brahman?

QUOTE(Dan @ Feb 22, 2012, 11:39 PM)

You can "know" the logical implications of unity/non-duality and deduce the contradiction with belief in "others". You may still be motivated toward something resembling altruism, but not because of pity.

Not because of pity but because of union. Then compassion or pity takes on a different context of meaning and value.

QUOTE(Dan @ Feb 22, 2012, 11:39 PM)

Some people just hide their marbles and play cat-and-mouse games to keep safe. They still have marbles to lose.

Yes, I've observed this in the pretense of your approach to enlightenment.

QUOTE(Dan @ Feb 22, 2012, 11:39 PM)

The "head in the sand" method is also a viable option for the deluded, a much nicer one for "others" for sure but no less delusory for the sandy-haired

The head in the sand idea doesn't fit within the examples that have been made here tho. It's more of the underlying angst followed by judgments regarding self measure of enlightened abilities that would seem to perpetuate the need to protect and attack, as was previously mentioned.i.e. the accusations of psychosis, the cult labeling, keeping score etc. etc.

BTW, I don't recall accusing you of psychosis. You have never been incoherent, as far as I can recall. Just voluminous.

Senior moment?

QUOTE(Dan @ Nov 04, 2003, 08:42 PM)

Your 'philosophy' is junk, all you do is convince people to ditch their life and follow you into your own narcissistic delusions. The fact of the matter is that you are a sociopath, manipulating people without conscience.

psy·cho·sisnoun, a mental disorder characterized by symptoms, such as delusions or hallucinations, that indicate impaired contact with reality.

so·ci·o·pathnoun Psychiatry .a person, as a psychopathic personality, whose behavior is antisocial and who lacks a sense of moral responsibility or social conscience.

Dude, psychosis and psychopathy are not the same. Even your definitions show this. In any case, I used the word "sociopath" which is itself not identical to psychopath. Psychopaths tend to be criminals, while sociopaths tend to be leaders. I am sure at least half of the US congress and/or senate is sociopathic in some way or another.

Dude, psychosis and psychopathy are not the same. Even your definitions show this.

Since they don't include the word psychosis in the definition of psychopathy or visa versa you might want to make that claim. However the language of both describe symptoms or conditions that exist in each other.To say that you've accused me of the conditions or symptoms that would apply to both definitions would not be inaccurate.

And (according to the definitive authority that you have posted) you could apply the idea of psychosis to just about all of the people who are living and dead, by picking one thought out of the bag and throwing it at someone according to your personal opinion.Psychosis:Causes, incidence, and risk factors

Alcohol and certain illegal drugs, both during use and during withdrawal Some prescription drugs, such as steroids and stimulants Bipolar disorder (manic or depressed) Delusional disorder Depression with psychotic features

Symptoms:

Psychotic symptoms may include:

Disorganized thought and speech False beliefs that are not based in reality (delusions), especially unfounded fear or suspicion Hearing, seeing, or feeling things that are not there (hallucinations) Thoughts that "jump" between unrelated topics (disordered thinking)

Jaysus, Joesus, you sure are hung up on this. Take a chill pill and repeat after me ... "Psychosis is not Sociopathy, even if I want it to be". Now drop the thoughtform, feel ego dissolve, and stare at clouds or something.

Hey, you brought it up in the conversation, I'm just following suit. If you wanna stop throwing these thought forms at me and want me to stop, you should have said so in the beginning rather than asking me to answer any of your questions in regards to your accusations of psycotic or psychopathic behavior when calling what I do or what I believe in a religion based on those qualities.